Accessibility of Delay Repay schemes for blind and partially sighted passengers

[JohnB27]

Hi all,

I'm a blind rail user who uses a screen reader to navigate web sites.
I'm trying to make a delay repay claim with London Northwestern and am finding that their form is totally inaccessible to screen reader users.
Just wondered if there are any fellow blind or partially sighted forum users who have experience of the delay repay process - either good or bad.
It appears each TOC has their own form, and some seem far better than others. LNR appear to use a third party supplier for theirs.
I realise I could ask a sighted person to fill in the form for me, but in this day and age of equality I shouldn't have to do this.
I should add that I work for a company who has to build web sites for local government and making sure they are accessible is a very hot topic these days, so I would have hoped that the same standards of accessibility would apply to the rail industry.

I also want to give a shout out to all those forum posters who take the time to describe images that they post - it really does make a difference to people like me and makes these forums a very inclusive place.

Thanks,

John

 

[TUC]

As with other non-rail online forms, they are very variable. Issues that are really unhelpful include when a box which requires completing simply says 'text field' audibly when selected, with no description of what the information required for the box is. Another is where a pop-up causes the whole screen to freeze until it is cleared. It can be very hard to know that a pop-up has appeared and to know where on the screen it is.

 

[yorkie]

Hi all,

I'm a blind rail user who uses a screen reader to navigate web sites.
I'm trying to make a delay repay claim with London Northwestern and am finding that their form is totally inaccessible to screen reader users.
Just wondered if there are any fellow blind or partially sighted forum users who have experience of the delay repay process - either good or bad.
It appears each TOC has their own form, and some seem far better than others. LNR appear to use a third party supplier for theirs.
I realise I could ask a sighted person to fill in the form for me, but in this day and age of equality I shouldn't have to do this.
I should add that I work for a company who has to build web sites for local government and making sure they are accessible is a very hot topic these days, so I would have hoped that the same standards of accessibility would apply to the rail industry.

Sorry to hear that.

West Midlands Trains (the train company operating trains branded LNR/WMR) don't make their email address easy to find, but it is [email protected] so you could email them the details and hopefully they will process it for you; I know they like people to use the form but they need to make a reasonable adjustment and allow an alternative.

I also want to give a shout out to all those forum posters who take the time to describe images that they post - it really does make a difference to people like me and makes these forums a very inclusive place.

That's great to hear! I hope you don't mind but I've created a thread to discuss that further https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ves-to-make-the-forum-more-accessible.233344/ as I feel it is an important issue which should be highlighted.

 

[JohnB27]

Sorry to hear that.

West Midlands Trains (the train company operating trains branded LNR/WMR) don't make their email address easy to find, but it is [email protected] so you could email them the details and hopefully they will process it for you; I know they like people to use the form but they need to make a reasonable adjustment and allow an alternative.

Thanks for the details. I've already raised a case with their customer services team via their online form (which is accessible) so will await their reply.
The LNR site itself isn't bad when it comes to accessibility - its just their third party operated delay repay form that is the issue.

That's great to hear! I hope you don't mind but I've created a thread to discuss that further https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ves-to-make-the-forum-more-accessible.233344/ as I feel it is an important issue which should be highlighted.

Fine with me. I'm still finding my way around the forum software itself so hopefully my quoting has worked correctly!

 

[yorkie]

No problem and yes it certainly has

 

[Blindtraveler]

The National Rail Enquiries website has a list of every train company and contact details and this does include email addresses.

When it comes to delay repay I use these in the first place and often get a spat back automated response telling me to fill in their stupid form. I then painstakingly explained for the second time that this form is often not easy or impossible to use due to my site and screen reader issues.

Usually they then comply but if they don't I simply ask a sighted person to do it for me as I would rather have the delay repay in my pocket than make a stand on accessibility issues.

 

[Adam Williams]

I believe there are some aspirations for retailers to offer delay repay so that passengers can claim in one place rather than it being distributed across TOCs.

I come from a public sector background myself, so am all too familiar with the requirements of The Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018

I spent a while when working on TrainSplit's seat selector trying to ensure it was accessible to screen readers, so we have textual descriptions of each seat on the map that screen readers should read out (example: "Seat 46 is a standard-class forwards-facing aisle seat") given it's hard to work these things out from a seat map diagram if you're visually impaired otherwise, but there's always more that you can do. There aren't really have such stringent legal requirements in the same way as in the public sector for private third party retailers, but it's the right thing to try and spend time on where possible where the data is available.

Hopefully if delay repay does become managed by retailers, you'll start to see more competition and ideally some improvements in this area. Not least because, if GBR becomes a retailer itself, it'll be bound by the public sector regulations itself!

 

[JohnB27]

Thanks all for your contributions.
I contacted WMT via email and they agreed to process my claim, so they have certainly met the "reasonable adjustments" criteria which is good.
However, I'm still pressing them to sort out the accessibility of their delay repay scheme, as I am sure there will be users out there who will just give up with the form. According to the RNIB, the accessibility requirements for public sector have been expanded to cover any business that offers its services to the general public, so I presume a TOC would fall into this category.

 

[Adam Williams]

According to the RNIB, the accessibility requirements for public sector have been expanded to cover any business that offers its services to the general public, so I presume a TOC would fall into this category.

I don't believe this is generally true..

There is (and has been!) an obligation under the Equality Act for a long time now for businesses not to discriminate (which is what RNIB uses normally when taking action), but nothing nearly as comprehensive as the Public Sector Bodies Accessibility Regulations which specified the technical standards we had to meet when publishing websites and apps.

If we had stayed within the EU, there would be something in this area in the way of the European Accessibility Act (which would regulate private sector companies properly), however we "took back control" and so it will now be down to the current government to come up with an equivalent law, which I very much doubt will happen.

 

[JohnB27]

I don't believe this is generally true..

There is (and has been!) an obligation under the Equality Act for a long time now for businesses not to discriminate (which is what RNIB uses normally when taking action), but nothing nearly as comprehensive as the Public Sector Bodies Accessibility Regulations which specified the technical standards we had to meet when publishing websites and apps.

Yes you are correct - it is the Equality Act they are relying on for non-public sector web sites. My biggest issue with WMT currently is that you are directed to the form, and if you're a screen reader user you hit a dead end. If you don't go looking for email addresses or other contact methods you won't even know that you can submit your claim via e-mail - I certainly didn't until coming on here.
What I believe they should be doing as a minimum is stating on their web site that they know their delay repay scheme isn't accessible and stating the methods available for people to submit their claims if they can't use the form. I imagine they don't want to do that as then everybody might start submitting their claims via email, as even my sighted friends tell me the form is rubbish.

 

[ainsworth74]

I don't believe this is generally true..

There is (and has been!) an obligation under the Equality Act for a long time now for businesses not to discriminate (which is what RNIB uses normally when taking action), but nothing nearly as comprehensive as the Public Sector Bodies Accessibility Regulations which specified the technical standards we had to meet when publishing websites and apps.

If we had stayed within the EU, there would be something in this area in the way of the European Accessibility Act (which would regulate private sector companies properly), however we "took back control" and so it will now be down to the current government to come up with an equivalent law, which I very much doubt will happen.

Though with the move to National Rail Contracts as opposed to franchising I wonder if there is not an argument to be made that they are covered by the public sector equality duty by virtue of carrying out a public function? They are after all publicly funded, they, arguably, provide a public service, are regulated by a government regulator and have a very close relationship with a government department.